Messages in this thread | | | From | Max Krummenacher <> | Date | Wed, 15 Jun 2022 18:10:48 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 0/5] power: domain: Add driver for a PM domain provider which controls |
| |
Hi
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 9:22 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Rob, > > On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 9:15 PM Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 09, 2022 at 05:08:46PM +0200, Max Krummenacher wrote: > > > From: Max Krummenacher <max.krummenacher@toradex.com> > > > > > > its power enable by using a regulator. > > > > > > The currently implemented PM domain providers are all specific to > > > a particular system on chip. > > > > Yes, power domains tend to be specific to an SoC... 'power-domains' is > > supposed to be power islands in a chip. Linux 'PM domains' can be > > anything...
I don't see why such power islands should be restricted to a SoC. You can build the exact same idea on a PCB or even more modular designs.
> > > > This allows to use the "regulator-pm-pd" driver with an arbitrary > > > device just by adding the 'power-domains' property to the devices > > > device tree node. However the device's dt-bindings schema likely does > > > not allow the property 'power-domains'. > > > One way to solve this would be to allow 'power-domains' globally > > > similarly how 'status' and other common properties are allowed as > > > implicit properties. > > > > No. For 'power-domains' bindings have to define how many there are and > > what each one is. > > IMO "power-domains" are an integration feature, i.e. orthogonal to the > actual device that is part of the domain. Hence the "power-domains" > property may appear everywhere. > > It is actually the same for on-chip devices, as an IP core may be > reused on a new SoC that does have power or clock domains. For > these, we managed to handle that fine because most devices do have > some form of family- or SoC-specific compatible values to control if > the power-domains property can be present/is required or not. > > But for off-chip devices, the integrator (board designed) can do > whatever he wants. Off-chip devices do have the advantage that it > is usually well documented which power supply (if there are multiple) > serves which purpose, which is not always clear for on-chip devices. > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > Geert > > -- > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > -- Linus Torvalds
| |